Petters: ‘I Didn’t Want a Bentley. I’m Not a Bentley Guy”

There must be no bigger thrill as a prosecutor than getting to cross examine a defendant who’s looked the Fifth Amendment in the eye and said ‘I need you not, self-incrimination clause. I will take the stand.’

It was that decision, made recently by Tom Petters and his lawyer, that presented such an opportunity to Minneapolis assistant U.S. attorney Joe Dixon. Petters, on trial for allegedly running a $3.65 billion Ponzi scheme, took the stand earlier this week, and, on direct examination, apologized for participating in an alleged Ponzi scheme over the last decade, but denied guilt for his role in the operation.

The cross-examination occurred on Thursday, and according to this story in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Petters and Dixon “sparred like boxers . . . as Petters’ weeks-long fraud trial moved toward its climax.”

We’re not sure if they teach this at NITA, but Dixon showed a bit of flair for the dramatic, by asking questions while facing the jury before turning to Petters for the answer.

For the most part, it sounds like Petters kept his cool. The Star-Trib reports that for several hours, Petters “stayed subdued and contrite until a Dixon question about his “corporate tycoon” lifestyle seemed to draw blood and Petters bristled.”

A sample of the questioning, according to the Star-Trib:

“You were the heart and soul of PCI?” Dixon asked, referring to Petters Co. Inc., which acted as the engine of the Petters business conglomerate.

About Law Blog

The Law Blog covers the legal arena’s hot cases, emerging trends and big personalities. It’s brought to you by lead writer Jacob Gershman with contributions from across The Wall Street Journal’s staff. Jacob comes here after more than half a decade covering the bare-knuckle politics of New York State. His inside-the-room reporting left him steeped in legal and regulatory issues that continue to grab headlines.

Must Reads

Plaintiffs' lawyers dodged a bullet last year when the U.S. Supreme Court spared a quarter-century-old precedent that had served as the legal linchpin of the modern investor class-action case. Despite that win, a new report suggests that securities class actions have lost some of their firepower.

In a week in which images of Prophet Muhammad were connected to acts of terror and defiant expressions of freedom, a sculpture of the prophet of Islam inside the U.S. Supreme Court has drawn little notice.

Alan Dershowitz has vowed to slap a defamation suit against the two lawyers who claimed in a court document that Florida financier Jeffrey Epstein arranged sexual liaisons for him with an underage prostitute. Those lawyers have beaten him to the punch.

The salacious allegations against Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz that surfaced in a federal lawsuit involving convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have generated international attention. Drawing less coverage is the lawsuit itself -- a case with the potential to expand the rights of crime victims during federal investigations.